White House threatens veto of defense bill

Source: Politico

The White House is threatening a veto of a major defense bill currently on the Senate floor if the measure is not changed, an official statement said Thursday.

The statement on the National Defense Authorization Act (posted here) lists a number of objections to the legislation, including language which limits transfers of prisoners from Guantanamo Bay, authorizations for various weapons programs not requested by the Pentagon, restrictions on U.S. force realignment in Japan, and limits on military use of alternative fuels.

The statement says President Barack Obama's senior advisers would recommend a veto of the bill if passed "in its current form."

4. I wonder if you'd care to tell us your opinion of Rand Paul's oath of allegiance to the NRA to

force the Senate into interfering with any UN treaties that seek to control the flow of American weapons into unstable 3rd-world countries around Earth, e.g. Libya, and thus to affect the conditions influencing what happens to *O*U*R* soldiers.

12. I do not know of Rand Paul's

allegiance or what he specifically said on this issue, but i do not believe that any foreign document should supersede this nations constitution. Is that wrong in your eyes? Do you believe that a foreign document should be able to supersede our own constitution?

21. Article I of the Constisution gives Congress explicit powers governing the military. Most of

arms sales are done pursuant to Department of Defense foreign military sales. Whether it's good policy is a valid question. The Constitutionality hasn't really been in doubt. It also can be Constitutinally permitted via treaty-making powers.

11. I am referring to this.

"the fact that I support this bill as a whole does not mean I agree with everything in it. In particular, I have signed this bill despite having serious reservations with certain provisions that regulate the detention, interrogation, and prosecution of suspected terrorists."

He was referring to the fact that a suspected terrorist by definition in the bill it self can be an american citizen. And because of this bill an american citizen can be held and detained indefinitely, without trial, although that is actually unconstitutional.

A judge then put a ban on the administration from using this on any american citizen, and the Obama administration immediatly appealed it, and got it overturned by another judge. This is what i was referring to.

But I do appreciate all of your interest on my post, I didn't mean to offend you, this was one of the few things the Obama Administration has done that really goes against what I believe.

18. It said in the article

The weapons programs which the White House is objecting to include F/A-18E/F Navy Fighters and upgrades to the M-1 Abrams tank. The administration also opposes a provision that would block funding for the MEADS missile defense system.